Cartoon of the day , DailyMIrror

Striking dons to hold rally

August 19, 2012, 9:56 pm, The Island by Dasun Edirisinghe

Striking university teachers are planning to hold a public rally this week as part of their campaign to pressure the government to grant their demands

President of the Federation of University Teachers’ Associations (FUTA) Dr. Nirmal Ranjith Devasiri told The Island that the strikers would hold the public rally on August 23 at the Hyde Park with the participation of public sector trade unions.

"We have invited all public sector trade unions to join us," the FUTAchief said, adding that all of them would proceed in processions from three places in the city and converge on the Hyde Park.

Protest marches would commence from the Viharamahadevi Park, Slave Island and the Gamini Hall junction, Dr. Devasiri said.

University teachers launched an all out strike from July 04 demanding that 6 per cent of the GDP be allocated for education, they be consulted when decisions are taken on the higher education sector and their salaries be increased.

Discussions the FUTAhad with the Higher Education Ministry, the National Salaries and Cadre Commission, Presidential Secretary Lalith Weeratunga and Economic Development Minister Basil Rajapaksa on their demands during last three months have failed.

Education policy and FUTA’s mandate: some thoughts

August 19, 2012, 7:39 pm , The Island


By Prof. Jayadeva Uyangoda
Member AFTA, University of Colombo

Some people have made an argument that FUTA has exceeded the mandate of a trade union when it demands the government to allocate 6% of the GDP to education. This argument emanates from the position that trade unions have no business with government’s fiscal policy. According to the advocates of this position, deciding priorities and policies of allocating government expenditure is entirely the job of the government and its policy-making officials.

This essay is only supplementary to the excellent response earlier circulated by Shamala Kumar of Peradeniya.

To begin with, the argument of FUTA exceeding its mandate emanates from a narrow, minimalist, and sorry to say, outdated, understanding of trade unionism. Although trade unions have often focused their struggles on wage demands, trade unionism in general has not been confined to wage-related demands alone. Those who have the slightest understanding of the history of trade unionism in Sri Lanka would know that even during the colonial times, Sri Lanka’s trade unions combined economic demands with social and political demands as well. It is wrong to suggest that trade unionism by definition is concerned exclusively and only on wage demands.

What the critics of FUTA’s demand for increased allocation of government expenditure on public education want from FUTA is to confine its concerns to a narrow and minimalist framework. But, neither the FUTA nor many of the trade unions in Sri Lanka or elsewhere are minimalist in their orientation, agendas and demands.

This wage-related minimalism in trade union agenda is a position advocated at present in Sri Lanka by two groups of FUTA critics. The first group represents the interests and policies of the government and the Ministry of Higher Education. The second group consists mostly of economists who appear to share the view that fiscal policy decisions are the exclusive prerogative of the economists at the Treasury, and not the lesser mortals, the proletariat, organised in trade unions. The latter position gives rise to the wrong notion that ‘economists and the Treasury know best.’

The demand by the FUTA as well as well as FUTA’s responses to its critics debunks this myth of exclusive privilege of policy-making monopoly in allocating government expenditure that some economists seem to accord to the Treasury, without listening to what the society, the people, the citizens, and the so-called stakeholders have to say. In a way, it reflects a specific culture of policy-making that has been advanced in Sri Lanka and many developing countries under neo-liberal economic reforms. As many critical studies of policy making under globalization, structural adjustment programmes and neo-liberal reforms show, economic policy making has now been reduced to a small group of an exclusive elite whose members are the country’s President or the Prime Minister, Finance or Economic Affairs Minister, the Treasury Secretary, the resident representatives of the World Bank and the IMF, and a few highly-paid expatriate or self-exiled policy consultants. The majority of this group are unelected people, who are not accountable to the people. Actually, one of the most undemocratic consequences of this development for governance is that neither Parliament elected by the people nor the Cabinet of Ministers consisting of people’s representatives has any serious say in public policy-making. They can only shout in anger when they do not get enough money for their ministries! That is why our Parliament and the Cabinet have been reduced to what they are today. In fact, one major indirect implication of the FUTA demand is for the Cabinet and Parliament to retrieve their right to decide priorities of public expenditure allocations in a manner that serves the people of the country, their electors, not the agenda of a small group of economists converted to the neo-liberal ideology.

It is also necessary for our critics and for us also to recognise that wage and economic demands of trade unions are integrally linked to public policy, especially in a context where our country is in a period of rapid policy change. That is precisely why workers in the Katunayake Free Trade Zone opposed the pension reform bill and organised demonstrations to show that opposition. It was an open challenge to government policy and it reflected the fact that economic welfare of the labour cannot be detached from the policy decisions of the government. When public sector unions opposed privatisation, they were challenging government policy. When the FUTA is asking to allocate 6% of the GDP to education, it is demanding policy reforms that directly affect their wage demands as well. In Sri Lanka, many trade unions have now realised that their wage and service conditions and government policies are so intertwined that improvement in the first calls for re-orientation of the second.

Those who know about trade union politics also know that advancing wage demands alone by trade unions creates a paradoxical challenge in which the wage demands benefit only its members, not the society at large. This is a problem that has been debated in the trade union movement in the world extensively, even in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. In Sri Lanka, employers and governments have always resorted to the tactic of branding wage demands of trade unions as having been motivated by the selfish interests of the members. This, in fact, happened during the first phase of the FUTA struggle. When a union broadens its concerns and links itself with issues of public interests that transcends the so-called selfish interests of its members, that union is accused of going beyond its mandate!

Moreover, the minimalist construction of the FUTA mandate by its critics is also a position that refuses to consider FUTA as a stakeholder in education in the country. It considers trade unions merely as organisations of wage-slaves that should not exceed their wage-labour mandate. This is actually a colonial as well as neo-liberal attitude to trade unions. It is colonial because, during colonialism, no trade union or a citizens’ organisation was expected to challenge the state, state policy or state officials. ‘Subjects’ did not have the right to challenge the rulers. They had to fight for that right. It is neo-liberal because the neo-liberal, as well as classical-liberal, ideology does not expect the citizens to be active participants in the political or policy process, except as passive individual citizens or minimally active consumers. It is social democracy that took trade unionism beyond these narrow confines and made trade unions active agents of social, political and policy change. Most of the trade unions in Sri Lanka have been nurtured in this social democratic tradition.

And it is sad that this colonial, outdated and hierarchical attitude to trade unionism is now being propagated by some of our own colleagues in the universities, some of whom are members of our own unions. May be the FUTA should organise a short course on trade unionism – Trade Union Politics 1101 –for its members who still operate on the colonial understanding of trade unions. In that course, some readings on new trends in trade union politics globally could be easily distributed for the benefit of all.

The role of trade unions as a stakeholder of public policy is a key principle that the FUTA highlights in the present phase of its struggle. This is a task that FUTA should continue to uphold as within its trade union mandate.

Academics need fresh thinking

August 18, 2012, 5:13 pm, The Island

The roadmap for Sri Lanka’s academics needs fresh thinking. The two articles by C.A. Chandraprema and Prof. Amal S. Kumarage, with the theme "University Dons in Cuckoo land" in the Sunday Island on the last two consecutive weekends deal with the subject. I am responding as a retired university teacher who joined academia after serving in industry for over two decades. The reasons for my career-transformation, I would not like to elaborate on, but it was definitely not prompted by any financial gain.

The two writers, with their own thinking based on their life experiences, refer to Cuckoo land of academics but the main thrust is on a flawed comparison of income and working conditions in academia and industry. The comparison of salaries does not take into account the nature of work and the motivation in the two disparate realms. Even if these crucial factors are discounted, both have not mentioned the privilege of taking Sabbatical full pay leave, the academics enjoy every seven years, which would amount to a 15% increase in accrued benefits. I am not taking into account the air tickets to any part of the world where one has got an invitation. The air fare includes that for the spouse and the possibility of earning extra income during the period.

This privilege may be illusive for most present day academics due to many reasons. But, I enjoyed two such occasions that took me and my wife to different parts of the world on work assignments and highly valuable exposure.

Teaching and Research

The academic world is one of teaching and research, which complement each other, and it calls for a commitment of a different nature to that of industry. Industry is motivated by profit-making and the salaries are paid based on delivery of services to meet this end. The extrinsic rewards for work of this nature, that could be assessed in the short-term do not apply to creative and self-directed work as found in the academia. There are several studies showing only intrinsic rewards that assist in the second category of work.

The main argument put forward by the academics is based on spending a minimum percentage of GDP on education. This assumes that GDP is a good measure of development in a country. What this type of measure would do to the universities is quite evident now: more buildings, laboratories and equipment but with internal decay promoted by politics, rivalry and jealousy.

The compartment with no water

An example I can quote comes from my own experience at the Open University working in water-tight compartments, highly protected by narrow thinking. We formed an Agricultural Engineering Department, with the help of the British Government, to cater to meet a dire need to infuse engineering to the ailing agricultural sector. Now, the department functions without a single engineer as the three engineers trained in the UK, including myself, have left due to many reasons, and no replacements have been done since then. Now there is only the compartment but no water!

Prof. Krishna Kumar of Delhi University says that academics now treat teaching as institutional work and research as furthering personal career. This seems to be the contention of Prof. Amal. S Kumarage too, when he says consultancy work is a distraction to teaching. Chandraprema thinks this is a way to solve the salary issue. I would think both are misguided in this regard. Any such interaction with the outside world is a must for better teaching.

Teaching based on reality

The lack of intellectual stimulation, among the students by attending the lectures and project work, stems from the dearth of experience of teachers based on reality. The answer to this is in the false measures, adopted in academic wisdom, of enforced attendance and the current ‘diploma disease’. This wisdom extends to teaching what is in demand but not what is needed.

The reported poor performance of foreign scholarship-students attending local universities may point to the obvious but sad situation prevailing in the local universities. It seems we are able to attract the worst students from other countries. This should be taken as a useful feedback and corrective action must be taken instead of carrying on with a captive audience of local A-level students who have no other choice other than joining the rat race.

The problem lies in treating education as an investment like operating a bus service. According to one writer the pay-back period in engineering education is just three years. Then why not ask the students to take bank-loans and pay tuition-fees as there will be no other such lucrative business opportunities elsewhere.

I feel the metaphor of RMS Titanic is very apt. If we go ahead without any change and even have wild dreams of producing 27,000 engineering graduates (equivalent to money spent on CPC hedging-deal!) the whole engineering profession will sink faster than the Titanic and the profession will be beyond any recovery, it may be too late.

Reassessment and soul

searching

What is needed is a reassessment of what the academics are doing, and assess whether it meets the needs of development, not mere accreditation mainly for foreign employment. Unless some soul-searching is done, the academics should not expect any support either from the public or the politicians. Instead, they could treat tertiary education as a business venture and continue to produce goods for the global markets.

Dr. Gamini Kulatunga

The Open University of Sri Lanka, Faculty of Engineering Technology retired)

Cartoon of the day , DailyMirror

Friday Forum bats for education

August 17, 2012, 9:52 pm , The Island


By Ravi Ladduwahetty

The Friday Forum yesterday cited a series of issues in the education sector which it said, was of utmost national importance in the larger interest of the vital sector of the economy.

The issues which were raised in at a news conference themed : " The crisis in the education sector," held at the Sri Lanka Foundation Institute yesterday afternoon, revolved round the lack of priority for consultative policy planning, political appointees being appointed for key posts, Militarisation of education, and Trade Union action by the Federation of University Teachers Association.

Former Vice Chancellor of both the Colombo and Open Universities and Professor of Law Prof Savithri Goonesekera in her opening remarks, said that there was a need to create a public debate on the education policy and what was happening in the current scenario

She also said that there was a need for the universities to have autonomy which was specified in the University Act, but what was happening was that the University Grants Commission was being politicized.

Prof. Gunasekera also commented at large on the lack of priority for Consultative Policy Planning in the educations sector.

When asked for perceptions and what he thinks of the trade union action of the Federation of University Teachers Association ( FUTA), retired career Diplomat Dr. Jayantha Dhanapala said that the perceptions of the Friday Forum on the FUTA activities was based on the broader perspective of the issues and not the trade union action.

Editorial

 

 

Stop this game of chicken

August 15, 2012, 7:15 pm , The Island

Our education system is a shaky pyramid crumbling at both ends––the apex and the base. School education is in crisis. But for a plethora of private tuition classes propping it up it would have collapsed a long time ago. School admissions are an unholy mess. Some schools are being closed down for want of students while others have as many as 60 children crammed into a single classroom. The remedy for alarmingly high failure rates in subjects like mathematics and science at the GCE O/L examination has been to lower the bar! Universities have gone the same way. Bankrupt ultra radical elements bent on disrupting university education and preying on resentful undergrads must be partying. For, the on-going dons' strike has crippled universities.

The government is acting as if there were no university strike. Half-hearted attempts at evolving a solution having failed, both the striking dons and the government have resorted to brinkmanship, so to speak. President Mahinda Rajapaksa has gone on record as saying that he is for a win-win situation, but his Higher Education Minister S. B. Dissanayake remains intransigent and determined to crush the strike. The government is waiting till university teachers blink and vice versa. They want to wear each other down.

The on-going tussle between the Federation of University Teachers' Associations (FUTA) and the government is a classic example of the game of chicken––a contest where neither party is prepared to yield, according to the mathematical Game Theory even at the risk of mutually assured destruction. The university strike is getting unnecessarily protracted. If it drags on indefinitely, which is likely to be the case at this rate, the country will be the loser. Unless the government cares to ensure the smooth functioning of universities, it might as well forget about its ambitious plan to make Sri Lanka the Knowledge Hub of Asia.

The FUTA has, no doubt, bitten off more than it can chew. But, the government must not make the mistake of treating university teachers like a bunch of terrorists and trying to walk all over them. Many of the strikers, it may be recalled, threw their weight behind President Rajapaksa at the last presidential election. The government ought to soften its stand and make a genuine effort to solve the problem. The same goes for university teachers who are intelligent enough to realise that trade unionism is the art of the possible and a labour dispute must not be turned into a zero-sum game if it is to be settled. Ideally, a country must spend at least 6 per cent of its GDP on education, but that target cannot be achieved overnight. Similarly, pay hikes given to one category of state workers usually have a domino effect across the public sector rife with salary anomalies. Therefore, the university dons must be flexible and realistic, though they deserve the salaries they are demanding.

The government cannot claim that it lacks funds to pay university teachers higher salaries. It is never cash-strapped when it comes to purchasing state-of-the-art choppers in peace time, building domestic airports, paying PAYE tax of certain categories of state workers to the tune of Rs. 2 billion per annum, bidding for mega sports events like the Commonwealth Games and holding ego-boosting, fund guzzling carnivals. Therefore, it must be able to save some funds being splurged on useless ventures to grant university teachers a substantial pay hike without playing tricks on them. Its claim that Sri Lanka's total spend on education already amounts to 6 per cent of GDP is ludicrous, to say the least. It has taken into account even expenditure incurred by some temples on vocational training in arriving at that figure! Minister Dissanayake should stop bandying about figures he does not understand.

The striking dons' demand that they be consulted when important decisions on universities are made could easily be granted as they have a crucial role to play in such matters. What is preventing the government from agreeing, in principle, that 6 per cent of GDP should be allocated for education and undertaking to work towards that end? We think it is the sheer arrogance of power.

Education is the only hope for a small country that lacks physical resources. Sri Lanka is badly in need of better schools and universities that conform to international standards. The government must step up investment in the education sector in order to export knowledge to the developed world instead of unskilled labour to West Asia. Else, it should seriously consider training the country’s children to grow bananas for western multinationals like Dole, which has already commenced its operations here.

Thankfully, Economic Development Minister Basil Rajapaksa, a good listener, has been entrusted with the task of negotiating with the striking dons. It is hoped that they will stop the game of chicken forthwith, make compromises and find a solution. And fast!

Sri Lanka’s education system

August 14, 2012, 6:06 pm , The Island


GCE Advanced Level commenced at 2,093 centres countrywide yesterday. There are 277,601 candidates sitting for the examination which is scheduled to continue till August 30. These school candidates were seen waiting till the examination commences at St Benedict’s College, Kotahena.

By Nipuni Panamaldeniya

Growing up in Sri Lanka, if someone had told me that I would move to Canada when I was 16, I certainly would have thought that they had surrendered to insanity. But when the opportunity arose for us to immigrate, we took it, knowing that sooner or later, my brother and I might have to pursue a higher education in a foreign country anyway.

I’ll be honest. I was never one of those kids with a brilliant mind and a seemingly endless supply of various talents. Whilst I may not have been brilliant, I was a hard worker, and I was raised to believe that hard work eventually pays off. I know from experience that the majority of students in Sri Lanka wake up at the crack of dawn to study, to attend tuition classes, to go to school, and to come back exhausted only to start the same cycle all over again. They do all this, and still find the time to excel in their extracurricular activities. I did the same whilst studying for my O/L examination. So I started wondering, what kept me going? What drives every student in Sri Lanka hoping to eventually enter university to dedicate all their time and energy to study so hard for, and pass all these examinations? And then I realised that it was pure faith. They believe wholeheartedly that if they give enough of themselves, if they sacrifice enough to study for these examinations, someday, all their hard work will pay off, and they will be able to enter university. Alas, for some of them, this isn’t true. I can only imagine the disappointment they must feel in a system which fooled them into believing in a dream, only to have it shattered in the end.

Don’t get me wrong, I love Sri Lanka. There is no other place I feel more at home, no other place I feel has the same magic, charm, and splendour as my mother country. I had a good life there. I didn’t lack for anything, and the childhood years I spent in Sri Lanka with my cousins roaming tea estates, splashing around in bubbling streams, and climbing hills in the afternoon heat just to slide down in a "kolapata" were some of the best days of my life.

But you don’t remain a child forever. Eventually, you grow out of those rose coloured glasses you used to view the world through. You lose that innocence, become jaded and begin to learn from whatever experiences which were bestowed upon your young life. So as a young child in Sri Lanka, I watched my older cousins go into battle with the beast known as the A/L examination. And yet, after undergoing what seemed like torture sessions of tuition, after putting their blood, sweat and tears into those examinations and passing, they still weren’t able to enter university. Don’t tell me that they weren’t smart enough, or that they didn’t work hard enough. I’m smart enough not to believe that. And so were they. So they found other means. They went abroad. And now they all have successful, thriving careers. Just not in Sri Lanka. Because, frankly, why come back to a country that pushed them away in the first place? I saw their point. And so after the Ordinary Levels, when my mother told us we had the opportunity to immigrate to Canada, my brother and I, of course, felt we would be fools to refuse.

I am not writing this to gloat about having the opportunity to enter university in another country. Too few of us are able to do that, I know, and those who aren’t as fortunate are fated to work jobs that they are perhaps over qualified for, and underpaid for. And this is a shame, it’s a waste of talent, and these kids grow disheartened thinking that they are not good for anything, when in fact, had they been given the opportunity, they might have been able to live their dream.

I was thinking of the irony here. I feel that, if hard work and dedication can get you into a university in another country, then hard work and dedication should certainly be able to get you into a university in Sri Lanka. And fine, I never took the A/L’s so I will never know whether or not I would have entered a university in Sri Lanka. But my cousins, who did work hard for their A/L’s and weren’t able to enter university in Sri Lanka, did enter universities in countries like Canada, US, and Australia. So am I to believe that the Sri Lankan education system is so far superior to any of these other countries that these students just weren’t intelligent enough to get in? Surely you jest. I mean really, if this were true, these Sri Lankan universities must be breeding some real Einsteins right about now. Or is it that there just isn’t enough space in the existing universities that those students who are smart, and work hard, still cannot get in? We all know that this is the reason. Not that it matters, because the mentality that this situation is purporting is that, you just do not have high enough of an I.Q. to enter university. Not only is this promoting low self esteem in students who are certainly well qualified enough to receive a university education, it is depriving them of a higher education that they are deserving of.

Trust me, I have nothing against the talent that is currently in Sri Lankan universities. Some of my best friends are pursuing their education at these institutions and I have utmost respect and admiration for them. But I cannot seem to get past the irony that those kids who are intelligent enough to enter universities in other countries cannot enter universities in Sri Lanka, prompting them to go abroad. So is there any surprise that Sri Lanka seems to be impacted by a "brain drain"?

Also, let’s not forget that after basically killing themselves to enter university, most of my friends who are in Sri Lankan universities right now are marooned at home because there are so many strikes going on. If I were them, I would have serious doubts as to whether this is the type of quality education that they struggled so hard to receive. However, this is another matter entirely and one that I do not know enough about to properly comment on. From what I can see though, the Sri Lankan education system seems to be a bundle full of irony.

I believe in a country that doesn’t smash its children’s hopes to smithereens, leaving only the carcasses of their dreams behind. I believe in a country where believing in your dreams and sacrificing everything for them doesn’t mean that eventually you will be left with nothing. I believe in a Lanka where every hard working student is given every opportunity to have their moment to shine.

FUTA trade union action– past and present –II

August 14, 2012, 4:51 pm , The Island


By Nalin de Silva

Twenty years ago FUTA did not consider the university academics a special category and the demands that were made to the authorities on salaries and other benefits were not based on that assumption. It is true that the university academics perform duties do not but that does not make them a special category. If they belong to a special category then all the others not only in the Universities but also in other places of work could claim themselves to constitute special categories and when each category considers itself special then the meaning of the word special category is lost. Except the demand that a 6% of the GDP be spent on education in general, all the other FUTA demands are based on the special category claim and as a result the demands cannot be justified. The universities in Sri Lanka are mainly teaching institutions and unfortunately no training is given to them in this field.

When I joined the then University of Ceylon as an assistant lecturer forty five years ago I had no training in teaching except for the experience I had as a teacher for six months at Wadduwa Central College instructing students preparing for university admissions in Pure and Applied Mathematics immediately after I sat my University Preliminary (Entrance) examination in 1962. Some of the students in my classes were older than I but that did not give me any experience in teaching. I do not consider myself to be a good teacher, and many students kept away from my lectures in all the three universities I have worked at as most probably they did not have anything to learn from me. One student who was taught by me at Wadduwa was unfortunate enough to find himself in my classes at Peradeniya! I have cited my experience at Wadduwa only to show that there was a dearth of teachers in most of the schools in Sri Lanka fifty years ago even in urban areas and over the years the situation has improved though there is much to be done especially in the rural areas. Like school teachers university lecturers also need training in teaching. It is true that some are born teachers but they constitute only a very small percentage which is negligible. It has to be mentioned that when this question came up twenty years ago many senior academics in the faculties other than that of education did not like the idea as they thought they had better qualifications than even their colleagues in the Faculty of Education. I do not want to go into details at this juncture as it would be embarrassing to some of them who are still living. If FUTA is interested in improving university education it should take up this matter with the UGC and the Ministry of Higher Education.

There has been an improvement in education in general over the years but parties with vested interests have been trying to show that there is a crisis in education at present. They are politically motivated as seen from the cry over the Z score problem and the mistakes in the G. C. E. (A/L) question papers this year. Some of these politically biased leaders of teacher unions and some journalists try to sling mud at the two ministers concerned as if they were responsible for the errors. The Z score problem is nothing but a creation of some university academics and journalists and, of course, some political parties and their leaders. The UGC appointed a committee of experts drawn from universities to come up with a recommendation on admission of students to the universities as there were two sets of students who had sat either the new syllabus or old syllabus question papers. The Examination Department issued the Z scores of students calculated according to the formula recommended by the UGC, which itself was recommended by the committee of experts. The committee most probably recommended a formula that they had taken from a book but unfortunately it was wrong conceptually. However, the error was marginal in practice and I am told that the application of the formula did not alter the percentages of students admitted to the universities in each stream from students who sat the examination for the first time and those who repeated. The politically biased teachers’ trade unions, politicians in the Opposition and some journalists unfortunately encouraged by Prof. R. O. Thattil were able to turn public opinion against the adoption of the formula of the experts drawn from the universities. It is interesting to note that the committee was not criticised for the method adopted but the two ministers concerned. That was nothing but politicalising an issue and it should be realised that it is not only the government that is responsible for politicalisation. The student bodies in the universities are politicalised and unfortunately even FUTA is now engaged in politicalised issues as seen from its current trade union action.

The politically motivated agitations over the Z score were followed by litigation and the Supreme Court decided that the Z scores should be calculated separately in the case of first timers and the repeaters for the purpose of admission of students to the universities. The UGC instructed the Examination Department eventually to calculate the Z scores separately and arrange them in descending order as had been suggested by Prof. Thattil. All hell broke loose and it was found that the repeaters who sat the question papers in the old syllabus had been penalised as a result. For example in the last few years of the students admitted to the Faculties of Medicine about 56% had been repeaters, but this year with the adoption of the Thattil method it had come down to about 24%! Now, the repeaters have gone before the Supreme Court and it appears that Supreme Court has said that the UGC did not carry out instructions given by the judiciary. If that is so it has to be investigated and the UGC should be punished if it has failed to implement an order of the Supreme Court. Already a senior UNP leader has said that the present problem is due to the non implementation of the Supreme Court decision, and the Minister of Higher Education should initiate action to obtain the Supreme Court decision if it is legally possible. Apparently some 8,000 students have been affected and it is the duty of the government to obtain the method recommended by the Supreme Court. However, it is unfortunate that FUTA is silent on this problem and has not thought of giving expert opinion of the academic staff who are members of the unions that are affiliated to FUTA.

It has been found that there have been mistakes in the question papers set for the G. C. E. (A/L) examination this year and the very same teacher trade union that politicalised the Z score issue is up in arms against the government. It could be claimed that the Minister of Education is ultimately responsible for the mistakes but it is only a lame theoretical position that can be adopted by the relevant trade union to criticise the minister. What these critics do not mention is that there have been mistakes in question papers over the years and this year is not an exception. It is certainly not due to the so-called crisis in education and the setters, moderators, controllers in chief of examinations in each question paper are university academics who are adequately remunerated for their work. Though it is desirable to have question papers without any errors the work done by the academics have to be appreciated and we have to admit that human errors are always possible. I myself have been involved with this work for a few years, and I know the amount of time and effort that go into setting of question papers and that very often the academic staff available is very minimal. I know of a situation where there were only two academics available for setting, moderating and proof reading four question papers! It is the practice for the board of examiners to get together and devise a marking scheme taking into consideration the errors. What is bothering me is the silence of FUTA on this problem.

(To be continued)

Malabe issue: Parents lash out at Vasu

August 14, 2012, 12:00 pm , The Island

By Don Asoka Wijewardena

The Malabe Parents’ Private Medical Association, comprising around 350 parents, yesterday condemned National Integration and Languages Minister Vasudewa Nanayakkara for spreading false information and condemning the SAITM without valid reason. Commenting on a recent statement, attributed to Minister Nanayakkara, a spokesperson for the association alleged the minister had thrown his weight behind those hell-bent on destroying the project. The Minister had stated that without the approval of the Russian universities, the Malabe PMC had fraudulently enrolled students for medical education. The PMC had no legal foundation and it could not produce doctors according to the International Standard.

The organization said that it was unbecoming of a Cabinet Minister to jump to irresponsible conclusions without knowing the real facts regarding the Malabe PMC. The UGC had given the degree awarding status to the PMC. It was announced by a special gazette notification.

The Organization added that around 350 students were studying at the Malabe PMC and they would complete the final exam here. Some trade unions were trying to mislead the general public into believing that degrees awarded by the PMC were not recognized in Sri Lanka.

It said that the SAITM had complied with the SLMC’s guidelines to become a medical degree awarding body. But, when the Sri Lankan government was about to recognize the PMC, some treacherous organizations were engineering secret sabotage activities. The truth would prevail, they said.